Interesting I wonder how the NK military would do in combat with American military. Looking at Wikipedia (if it is correct) it would sort of be the modern US arsenal versus a mid to late 80s Sovietesque military.

Interesting I wonder how the NK military would do in combat with American military. Looking at Wikipedia (if it is correct) it would sort of be the modern US arsenal versus a mid to late 80s Sovietesque military.

If North Korea starts something without the active backing of China, I'd expect the result to be like the first Gulf War: short and to the point. Militarily they're vaguely equivalent (though the asymmetric warfare focus might make it nasty) and politically they'd be similar, particularly if Seoul was attacked. Bonus: South Korea has the legitimacy to step in and pick up the pieces afterwards.

If someone else starts something, I'd expect something closer to the second Gulf War politically and militarily, modulo the different terrain (and the potentially legitimizing presence of South Korea). Which is why I don't expect anyone to actually attack them without significant provocation. (Nuking Seattle would probably count, unfortunately. Not that I expect that to happen.)

This is likely to be another non-event, but from my limited knowledge the regime isn't as strong as it used to be, so there's always a chance that the next crisis will be the tipping point.

North Korea is just blustering. When you're an oppressive autocratic regime, it's much easier to keep the people under control if you invent an enemy who wants to destroy you. North Korea will keep doing this, just like they've been doing it for years. It's not crazy, it's just the same old calculated blustering.

Seattle, where the weather is unlikely to kill you in an interesting fashion.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

North Korea is just blustering. When you're an oppressive autocratic regime, it's much easier to keep the people under control if you invent an enemy who wants to destroy you. North Korea will keep doing this, just like they've been doing it for years. It's not crazy, it's just the same old calculated blustering.

(A nuclear attack on Seattle would likely be considered a valid casus belli, giving the United States both justification and the political will to retaliate. However this would be an unfortunate occurrence, especially for Seattle, even if Jonman gets superpowers as a result. It is also very unlikely to actually occur.)

(A nuclear attack on Seattle would likely be considered a valid casus belli, giving the United States both justification and the political will to retaliate. However this would be an unfortunate occurrence, especially for Seattle, even if Jonman gets superpowers as a result. It is also very unlikely to actually occur.)

I would say that nuking a large metropolitan area would absolutely be a valid cases bellow, and while the nuking would be unfortunate, I don't think the fact that nuking a city would set the USA off is unfortunate, which is what it seemed like you were saying.

Of course a lot of lesser crimes also set the USA off, which is unfortunate.

In either case I think any war with North Korea would have nasty and unfortunate collateral damage, particularly to South Korea, regardless of the justness of the cause. (China has a huge influence on just how nasty it would get.)

A peaceful end to North Korea would probably be in the best interests of the North Korean people, since that would presumably allow South Korea to step in and bridge the gap: it wouldn't be easy, but South Korea has both a G-20 economy and moral ties that would hopefully allow a unified Korea to weather the crisis. No idea how likely that is anytime soon, though.

I would say the backing of China. Nuclear weapons will be a great help in the future, but without originally the Soviet Union and China, and then (and now) China alone, it never would have lasted long enough to develop them.

Here's a question. What keeps North Korea standing where other regimes have fallen? The backing of China? Nuclear weapons?

At one point it was their military, in terms of size, as well as China. Now I think it's just China, though they're showing more signs that they are displeased with North Korea as time goes on. Nukes may become a factor in the future. They aren't yet.

I want to put "a deluded/brainwashed populace with no choice" down there as well, as I'd like to think we wouldn't want to kill people who have no choice in who they're backing and little knowledge of the outside world. I'm not sure if that's an actual factor though.

"I basically do what Lou says." -- Yonder "My love is for Lou." -- LiquidMantis
"LouZiffer is a gentleman, a rogue, and a fantastic lover." -- Vector
"You could yoink it for a Sig." -- Demosthenes

Yeah, their military may have been an issue in the past, but I think the second Iraq war has definitely put to bed the idea that a 60s to 70s era military can threaten or even slow down the US no matter the size.

I was stationed on the South Korean border in the Army, and I can say from experience the NK army would not be a pushover like Iraq. For one thing, the terrain is much closer to Afghanistan than Iraq. The US would not be able to mass maneuver its tanks or quickly deploy Striker units. North Korea has a metric butt ton of artillery that while not particularly accurate can do massive damage just by focus fire. Then there are the North Korean Special Forces which number nearly 100000. Now, they certainly don't have the equipment of American spec ops, but their combat training from what I've read/seen in documentaries is just as intensive as Army ranger training. Look at how much trouble untrained insurgents caused in Iraq and then think how much damage well trained commandos could do. America would quickly gain air superiority, but once again the terrain makes it difficult to carpet bomb with impunity.

The good news? Their long range missiles are absolute crud and it would be a miracle for them to hit a US city. Of course, it would be very easy to either bit Seoul or take out a few American divisions with those nukes.

The Atlantic did a story on war gaming Korean War 2.0 and it wasn't pretty. We would certianly win but casualties would be likely the highest since WW II. And if a nuke or massive chemical attack devastated Seoul, it would majorly disrupt the world economy. From the article;

The North Korean situation is also ripe for war-game treatment, because of the extraordinarily difficult military and diplomatic challenges it presents. Iran, considered an urgent national-security priority, is thought to be three to five years away from possessing even a single nuclear device. North Korea is widely believed to have as many as ten already, and to be producing more every year. (It is also the first developing nation thought to be capable of striking the continental United States with a long-range ballistic missile.) And whereas Iraq did not, after all, have weapons of mass destruction, North Korea is believed to have large stockpiles of chemical weapons (mustard gas, sarin, VX nerve agent) and biological weapons (anthrax, botulism, cholera, hemorrhagic fever, plague, smallpox, typhoid, yellow fever). An actual war on the Korean peninsula would almost certainly be the bloodiest America has fought since Vietnam—possibly since World War II. In recent years Pentagon experts have estimated that the first ninety days of such a conflict might produce 300,000 to 500,000 South Korean and American military casualties, along with hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths. The damage to South Korea alone would rock the global economy.

TLDR - America would win but we'd be looking at American military casualties in the tens of thousands, a devastated Seoul and likely a global recession due to the fallout. And not to discount civilian casualties on both sides which could number in the millions. Quite frankly, I don't see America having the stomach for anything approaching that intensity.

The idea that North Korea is a threat to anyone, especially the United States, is absurdly laughable. Their economy is stunted and paralyzed, and they've required food aid for the last fifteen years to stave off mass starvation. Their fuel supplies are so low that a significant portion of their transportation infrastructure relies on wood gas and steam for propulsion.

From a military perspective, they have virtually no options. The DMZ is one of the most heavily fortified areas in the world - all of the available avenues of attack are well known, heavily mined, pre-targeted, and full of obstacles. The terrain is some of the least hospitable in the world, which is why the Korean War was comprised of static trench fighting for the last two years. Given the virtually guaranteed South Korean air superiority and highly accurate, mobile long-range artillery, there's no way for the North Koreans to extend their supply lines across the DMZ. In short, any attack by the north is virtually guaranteed to be a mass suicide.

The only remotely viable military option they have is artillery bombardment of Seoul, which would last only as long as it took the South Korean counterbattery fire to destroy the attacking artillery or seal the entrances to their firing positions. Since this gains the North Korean regime nothing and invites counterattack, it is highly unlikely to happen - and that's not even considering the Chinese opposition to such an action. The same goes for a nuclear attack on anyone.

The North Korean regime's power rests on portraying the Americans and South Koreans as enemies. We are the threat they use to stay in power, and we constantly play into their hands by being belligerent, hostile, and combative. The best approach we could take to undermine and eventually dismantle their regime would be to end the sanctions and open up trade and communications. The more North Koreans who realize how backward their country is, the more pressure there will be for things to change.

"The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools." Herbert Spencer, State-Tamperings with Money and Banks

The only remotely viable military option they have is artillery bombardment of Seoul, which would last only as long as it took the South Korean counterbattery fire to destroy the attacking artillery or seal the entrances to their firing positions. Since this gains the North Korean regime nothing and invites counterattack, it is highly unlikely to happen - and that's not even considering the Chinese opposition to such an action. The same goes for a nuclear attack on anyone.

This is why the South Koreans are interested in Iron dome and other ballistic projectile interception systems. It would give the South Koreans both time and the exact coordinate of where the projectiles originated from . This kind of technology can deter the NK from attacking. If South Korea gets David Sling/Arrow system the NK won't even be able to nuke SK effectively. I think what the Koreans should get is either nuclear weapons or a reliable nuclear umbrella in order to assure M.A.D.

Aetius wrote:

The North Korean regime's power rests on portraying the Americans and South Koreans as enemies. We are the threat they use to stay in power, and we constantly play into their hands by being belligerent, hostile, and combative. The best approach we could take to undermine and eventually dismantle their regime would be to end the sanctions and open up trade and communications. The more North Koreans who realize how backward their country is, the more pressure there will be for things to change.

That is true but The problem with such an oppressive well organized regime is that they won't hesitate to kill their people. The Syrians have/had a similar regime which controlled the country with an Iron Grip. The rebellion was mainly done by an ethnic majority against a controlling ethnic minority. The situation in syria is still not over and there were about 70000 dead out of the 20+~ million people who live there. There are also massive refugee camps in Jordan and Turkey.

The North Koreans have a few countries they can trade with like China and Iran so they are in no hurry to make any sort of reforms. I haven't heard of any North Korean protestors . Similarly to Syria the North Koreans have developed unconventional weapons as a deterrent to an external threats. Those weapons can't be used against a rebellion but if a rebelion start the unconventional arsenal ensure there won't be any foreign intervention like in Libya.

an inspiring quote to fill this spot:
"Our words are free now it's a feeling you can't explain"...." Born as we are out of the revolution to be free. " Barak Obama in Noy Alooshe's remix

I agree with you Aetius, to a point. Every time people get all hot and bothered over North Korea it makes me wonder if they've just heard of this nation, or have forgotten how they do this about three times a year (usually when they're hungry). What's going to happen next is that the UN is going to offer North Korea a bunch of food to come to the table and talk about their feelings, and then once the weather improves North Korea will invent some horrible slight to get all offended over as an excuse to walk out. Then Big Kim'll shed a single tear from hell, because he's taught his son well.

The "to a point" part comes in because Lil' Kim IS new at this, and it's unclear just how much of his own hype he believes. He's seen the outside world so I'm sure he doesn't buy ALL of his own government's propaganda, but maybe he thinks backing up his bark by biting someone could gain him some credibility or bargaining power. I don't think that's terribly likely (thought it was more likely that Kim Jong Il would want to go down in a nuclear blaze of glory and that didn't happen) but who knows? Not like Lil' Kim's doing interviews on Oprah.

Though I wonder if South Korea would actually launch a counter-attack (assuming they were the target). They're trying really, really hard to play nice with North Korea. An attack on their capital would obviously be a huge deal, but I'm not entirely sure they wouldn't try to turn the other cheek in a final attempt to avoid an all-out conflict, no matter how easily they'd crush North Korea.

DanyBoy wrote:

MaxShrek wrote:

Technically the Korean War never ended, so technically the North has been at war with the South since 1954, so technically, so has the United States.

It amazes me that this has never been taken care of, if for nothing more than a symbolic gesture.

I think that if the US calls attention to that fact, people will start wondering when we're going to declare peace with Iraq and/or Afghanistan. Then it's just a small jump to them remembering that we never declared war on either, and that that's a breach of our Constitution. And nobody wants that.

The "to a point" part comes in because Lil' Kim IS new at this, and it's unclear just how much of his own hype he believes. He's seen the outside world so I'm sure he doesn't buy ALL of his own government's propaganda, but maybe he thinks backing up his bark by biting someone could gain him some credibility or bargaining power. I don't think that's terribly likely (thought it was more likely that Kim Jong Il would want to go down in a nuclear blaze of glory and that didn't happen) but who knows? Not like Lil' Kim's doing interviews on Oprah.

I wonder how much control he really has. He may be new to this, but the apparatus which surrounds him isn't. Change, for them, would be extremely painful and possibly deadly. I'm sure they benefit a great deal from maintaining the status quo for as long as possible.

"I basically do what Lou says." -- Yonder "My love is for Lou." -- LiquidMantis
"LouZiffer is a gentleman, a rogue, and a fantastic lover." -- Vector
"You could yoink it for a Sig." -- Demosthenes